Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge Malihi Rules Against Plaintiffs: Says Obama Born In Hawaii Therefore Natural Born Citizen
BirtherReport.com ^ | 2/3/2012 | Kevin Powell

Posted on 02/03/2012 2:19:38 PM PST by GregNH

We just spoke with plaintiff Kevin Powell and he reports Judge Malihi has ruled against the Plaintiffs and stated in his order that Obama was born in Hawaii and therefore Obama is a natural born Citizen.

(Excerpt) Read more at obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com ...


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: birthcertificate; certifigate; ga; georgia; malihi; naturalborncitizen; obama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 501-550551-600601-650 ... 701-726 next last
To: Danae
They’re cutting us some slack.

I don't think there is enough slack for what I wanted to say!

LOL...I have to get out of here before I go nuts, I have chores to do anyway.

I'll talk to you later, hope you have a good day!

551 posted on 02/04/2012 10:56:27 AM PST by Las Vegas Ron (Rush Limbaugh = the Beethoven of talk radio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 548 | View Replies]

To: Danae
I think Apuzzo is out of the gate first witha great appeals worthy brief for Malihi’s punt to Ankeny:

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2012/02/all-that-is-wrong-with-georgia-state.html

Leo is working up his version as we speak, no doubt...

552 posted on 02/04/2012 11:17:09 AM PST by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 542 | View Replies]

To: jaydee770

“The US does not have sole claim to those kids and those kids can (and do) eagerly claim their foreign citizenship as well as their US citizenship. I fail to see how something this simple completely escapes those in black-robes who “think they know better”

“Under the sovereignty” doesn’t mean sole claim. If that were true, a US citizen couldn’t have a second citizenship. It means under the jurisdiction of the laws of the US. Every tourist, businessman and illegal alien who’s here from another country is under the sovereignty or jurisdiction of the US while he’s here.


553 posted on 02/04/2012 11:28:04 AM PST by tablelamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 550 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp; Mr Rogers
The Condition of being "natural born" cannot be changed by statute.

Nor by any other law made by political process, such as a Constitutional Amendment.

A natural citizen is such by natural law, and not for any other reason. Natural law defines what is true by the nature of the world, regardless of what any political entity may decree. So the 14th Amendment cannot have changed who was or was not a natural citizen. It's text makes no claim that it does.

To see who the natural citizens are, remove all the laws and Constitutional definitions regarding citizenship. Whoever are still citizens must be so naturally, by the nature of things. Any such who weren't so from birth—such as those who became citizens at the moment the nation came into existence, without needing any statute or Constitutional provision—are natural citizens. Any who were such from birth are also natural born citizens.

By definition of natural and born.

554 posted on 02/04/2012 11:32:43 AM PST by sourcery (If true=false, then there would be no constraints on what is possible. Hence, the world exists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 510 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Harlan1196 uses a common leftist liar trick. He makes two false statements in the same assertion in order to try and confuse the reasoning and thus establish his specious point. I suspect the poster is an obamanoid having fun with the ‘rube birthers at FR’. Drew68 is doing that and the anti-birthers are having their fun. Ultimately what these do is revile in lies and deception, openly mock any notion of right and wrong. Barry revealed their mindset with his ‘we won, you lost, get over it.’ Several of the obamanoids haveposted that snippy response in one form or another, one in particular was fond of stating it as ‘eat crow and like it’. Harlan is just as smarmy, but not yet as juvenile. He/she/it is only sunken tot he level of ‘I write the truth; if you can’t handle it that’s tough’. Whether these creeps speak the truth or not isn’t even the issue anymore. Where are the guillotines?


555 posted on 02/04/2012 11:59:34 AM PST by MHGinTN (Being deceived can be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 365 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN; Drew68

Drew68’s kids aren’t NBC’s... thus the twisted knickers.


556 posted on 02/04/2012 12:12:43 PM PST by freepersup (Hi, I'm Michael Jablonski, and right about now my you know what is tighter than a tree's rings.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 555 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp; David

Wow, that was FAST. It is almost as if he anticipated what malihi would do. but then I have heard this was going to be the outcome from a couple of different sources. I had hope they were wrong, but really, I should have known better.

Malihi took the total punt option. Flippin coward. Relying on an INDIANA STATE CASE instead of SCOTUS.... its insanity!

I hope those with the resources will perk up and start aggressively dismantling the Indiana case, appeal it and Georgia, and get’erdone!


557 posted on 02/04/2012 12:16:48 PM PST by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 552 | View Replies]

To: Harlan1196
He is a legal cypher - no publications, no significant cases. What makes him a Constitutional scholar in your eyes?

In the magical world of birtherland, titles such as "document expert" and "constitutional scholar" are bestowed upon individuals for no other reason than saying what birthers want to hear.

558 posted on 02/04/2012 12:18:21 PM PST by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Entered as an exhibit affirming my accusation about obamanoids.


559 posted on 02/04/2012 12:21:06 PM PST by MHGinTN (Being deceived can be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 558 | View Replies]

To: Danae

Most people will not see it coming.

I do not know what the numbers are but the founding fathers were probably 20-25% of the population.

Sad state of affairs and unnecessary but probably predictable throughout human history.


560 posted on 02/04/2012 12:21:55 PM PST by Hang'emAll (Ride to the sound of the guns!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 545 | View Replies]

To: tablelamp
"Irion and Hatfield conceded that he was born in Hawaii "

So does that mean we ALL concede that? I sure don't

561 posted on 02/04/2012 12:29:52 PM PST by Mr. K (Physically unable to profreed <--- oops, see?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 544 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp; Smokeyblue

OMG I just checked my signup date- I just realized I have been freeping for nearly 20 YEARS!!

I need to go outside and get some sun


562 posted on 02/04/2012 12:32:02 PM PST by Mr. K (Physically unable to profreed <--- oops, see?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 504 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K
"OMG I just checked my signup date- I just realized I have been freeping for nearly 20 YEARS!!

By what standard is 12.8 or thereabouts "nearly 20?"

563 posted on 02/04/2012 12:37:57 PM PST by Chunga (Ron Paul is a fruitcakey jackass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 562 | View Replies]

To: Chunga

because I was reading online for a long long time before I signed up to post


564 posted on 02/04/2012 12:39:52 PM PST by Mr. K (Physically unable to profreed <--- oops, see?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 563 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

I remember and I believe it’s true. His first USA passport was his “ceremonial” Senate one. That is why his passport files were breached and why people died.


565 posted on 02/04/2012 12:40:46 PM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 546 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K; Chunga
I got yer' back Mr K.. Lurking (reading) is freeping, so saith freepersup.
566 posted on 02/04/2012 12:44:42 PM PST by freepersup (Hi, I'm Michael Jablonski, and right about now my you know what is tighter than a tree's rings.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 564 | View Replies]

To: Danae

You should. Write it now so that he has more years to live in shame and ignomy.

Pray for this nation? Every day, my friend. Every day.


567 posted on 02/04/2012 12:45:08 PM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 537 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle
And the man who ran the criminal scrubbing was subsequently appointed by little barry bassturd to his administration’s inner circle. It's the Chicago Way don’tchaknow. And democrat voters think it's cool that these criminal enterprise democrats continue to get away with aborting the Republic. The suffering that's coming like a freight train now will be small consolation for their treachery.
568 posted on 02/04/2012 12:45:44 PM PST by MHGinTN (Being deceived can be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 565 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

Ya’ might as well say the name- John Brennan.


569 posted on 02/04/2012 12:49:20 PM PST by freepersup (Hi, I'm Michael Jablonski, and right about now my you know what is tighter than a tree's rings.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 568 | View Replies]

To: Harlan1196
Photobucket
570 posted on 02/04/2012 12:55:31 PM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 466 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1

If that billboard is for real, I’m surprised some enterprising soul hasn’t planted a red-paint-filled water balloon on the smirking kisser.


571 posted on 02/04/2012 1:02:04 PM PST by MHGinTN (Being deceived can be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 570 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN; bushpilot1

They are so transparent it’s funny.

“No one here but us chickens.” LOL


572 posted on 02/04/2012 1:02:57 PM PST by Smokeyblue (Obama's got NBC problems and birth certificate problems - a bad case of Cluster F**ked.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 555 | View Replies]

To: GGMac; GregNH; Seizethecarp; butterdezillion; Fred Nerks; Red Steel; fireman15; bushpilot1

Here is one of the better well organized timelines of the 1967-1971 period.

http://www.wnd.com/2010/08/187825/

http://consider-freedom.blogspot.com/2010/08/obama-citizenship-issue.html

The whole Lolo Soetoro / Indonesia period seems a mess.

Lolo Soetoro received his degree in 1964. What did he do until March of 1965?

Why is the marriage usually characterized as having occurred in 1967 when in happened in 1965?

Why was Obama removed from SAD’s passport in 1968? After that - what passport did he use?

Why are what almost appear to be parallel Barry’s in Indonesia and in Hawaii in 1969 through 1971? The 3rd grade 1969 picture. The article that references Obama II meeting Frank Marshall Davis in 1970. The references to starting school in Hawaii in 1971 before he supposedly came over in October. This parallel existence has never been explained.

Then there is the ‘grand meeting’ in December 1971/January 1972. And at the end Barry is with the Dunhams with no other guardians or parents within 3,000 miles for an indefinite period.

After that there is the Connecticut SS number. Issued sometime in March of 1977. This is when Obama would be only 15.

He does apparently go to Oxy on a full scholarship. From where or did the scholarship come from? What scholarship? This is reported by the LA Times.

http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jan/29/local/me-oxy29

“...the 1,825-student liberal arts college in the Eagle Rock neighborhood of Los Angeles isn’t shy about claiming him as an alumnus for his two years there (1979-81) on full scholarship. Perhaps, some think, it’s where his political and oratory skills were nurtured.”

“...on full scholarship...”

Another odd thing. It is indicated that SAD and Obama II came to Hawaii in 1971 on Pan Am flight 812. A quick internet search reveals that is a famous (or rather infamous) flight number.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Pan-Am-Flight-812/113911498658778

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_812

In 1974 the flight was in Indonesia. But going from Japan to Australia with a stop scheduled in Indonesia. But tragedy struck the flight then. Maybe Pan Am changed the flight numbers between 1971 and 1974. But its an odd coincidence. Or maybe the route was from Indonesia to Australia then to Hawaii. This would explain the 2 days of travel since the international date line comes into play.

The grand meeting of December 1971 is likely a wormhole for the birth/identity records. No way do the grandparents take Obama II without solid guardianship and citizenship defined with both parents out of the picture. And namesake dads visit was not just a meet and greet.

I also always found this report odd. The governor supposedly sealing the records. Since when do governors seal records? What gives them legal authority to do so? Judges seal records. And judges may have sealed Obama’s records in 1971. Lingle may have meant to say they are sealed. But she lacks the authority to do it.

http://www.wnd.com/2008/10/79174/

http://theobamafile.com/_eligibility/LingleLies.htm

http://24ahead.com/lingle-obama-hawaii


573 posted on 02/04/2012 1:05:47 PM PST by bluecat6 ( "A non-denial denial. They doubt our heritage, but they don't say the story is not accurate.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 503 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

http://allafrica.com/stories/201107300003.html


574 posted on 02/04/2012 1:31:21 PM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 571 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

Double Double Obama


575 posted on 02/04/2012 1:45:10 PM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 571 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1

The Obama family in Africa were leeches..

(Ruth) “She was now the sole support of the household. Not only did she pay the rent, the household expenses, and the wages of the housekeeper, she also signed the checks for five private school tuition’s.”


576 posted on 02/04/2012 1:54:10 PM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 575 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1

Perhaps, someday, the world will discover what the obama thuggery held over Linda Lingles head in order to get her to her knees in service of the lies for the affirmative action fraud. Perhaps


577 posted on 02/04/2012 1:56:52 PM PST by MHGinTN (Being deceived can be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 576 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

What’s the first name the illegal Aunt in Boston? Does it begin with a Z.?


578 posted on 02/04/2012 2:05:19 PM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 577 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1

Zeituni


579 posted on 02/04/2012 2:06:34 PM PST by dinodino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 578 | View Replies]

To: Danae

Evil incarnate. That’s all I can say.


580 posted on 02/04/2012 2:16:15 PM PST by Greenperson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 541 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

“By the time he(Obama) returned to the house, he was often stumbling and barely coherent.

The children, cowering in their beds, listened as he crashed into furniture and cursed at his own clumsiness.”

Ruth obtained a restraining order on Double Double Obama.

Double Double ignored the restraining order; “one night Obama returned from the bars in his usual ill humuor, except this time he had a knife”.

“He came to the door one day, banging, banging and Auma let him in of course, being a child,” Ruth recalled. “And when he came in he had that knife. He laid it against my neck as he shouted at me. I was terrified of course.”

Double Double Obama held a knife at Ruth’s throat.


581 posted on 02/04/2012 2:18:37 PM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 577 | View Replies]

To: dinodino

Zeituni Obama lived in the back yard (Ruth’s rented house) in a small shed.

How did Zeituni get to the US. Did she paddle her way in the shed?


582 posted on 02/04/2012 2:28:56 PM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 579 | View Replies]

To: tablelamp

>>...“Under the sovereignty” doesn’t mean sole claim. If that were true, a US citizen couldn’t have a second citizenship...<<

Perhaps it was awkwardly phrased — to be clear, my intent was that the US could not claim *sole* sovereign jurisdiction **regarding a newborn’s citizenship** simply because, by pure accident of birth, they happened to be born on US soil. The country(s) of the child’s parent(s), if they are not citizens of the child’s country of birth, will usually have some say in the matter of the child’s citizenship.


583 posted on 02/04/2012 2:47:39 PM PST by jaydee770
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 553 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle
There is zero evidence he was legally adopted by Soetoro.

I wouldn't say there was ZERO evidence.

And then there was this statement by Maya Soetoro:

"You mentioned the adoption laws of Indonesia that you saw as related to my brother's legitimacy (you were suggesting that because my father, his stepfather, had adopted him, that my brother was no longer American) and I said that I had no idea about Indonesian adoption law.

And then there is this:

With Lame Cherry's analysis of it.

There are the Dunham/Soetoro Divorce Records which say:

“The parties have 1 children below age 18 and 1 chidren above 18 but still dependent on the parties for education.”

So like I said, I wouldn't say there was "ZERO" evidence of it. There is some. It is not absolutely conclusive, but it is certainly indicative.

584 posted on 02/04/2012 3:14:06 PM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 525 | View Replies]

To: Obama Exposer
Actually, Malihi based his decision on Jablonski’s ‘Motion To Dismiss’. Jablonski cites Ankeny v Daniels in it. Also there is a Jill Pryor connection to all of this.

Does anyone else see how ridiculous it is to decide the laws of one state by what a state court may have ruled in another state? Amateur-like work product is all I can say.

585 posted on 02/04/2012 3:17:36 PM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 528 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
Yes, when the Entire world believes the World is flat, Columbus cannot be correct.* When the Entire World has decided that the Earth is in fact round, and at the center of the Universe, Galileo must be wrong when he says that it is not. When the ENTIRE Scientific community says that Light is carried by Ether waves, the Albert Einstein must be mistaken when he says that it is not.

Scientific facts have an existence independent of what anyone knows or thinks. Law is different; law, by definition, is what legislators and judges say it is. Otherwise, how could the law be different in New York from New Jersey or Alabama. As Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote more than 100 years ago, when you ask a lawyer what the law is, you are asking for nothing more or less than an accurate prediction of what a court will rule if asked this quesstion next week.

586 posted on 02/04/2012 3:28:44 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 487 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Ron
Well said, explains so much in such a succinct way.

Too bad the poster you're responding to won't get it.

I think the problem is a lack of ability to comprehend complexity. The answer they like is simple and easy to understand, while the answer which is correct requires thinking and research to understand.

Those people which keep chanting "Born Here Good! Not Born here Bad!" remind me of those people in the movie "Idiocracy" and their meaningless slogan about brawndo.

Just as those stupid bastards were killing their crops with the stuff, these morons are killing our nation with THEIR version of "brawndo." Only a moron would think "anchor babies" and "birth tourism" is reasonable interpretation of the law.

The founders weren't stupid. It's a sorry state of affairs that their descendants are. I fear there will be much blood before the end of it.

587 posted on 02/04/2012 3:32:06 PM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 536 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K
OMG I just checked my signup date- I just realized I have been freeping for nearly 20 YEARS!!

I need to go outside and get some sun

I have been arguing on line for 20 years, but i've only been a freeper for a little less than 1 year. :)

588 posted on 02/04/2012 3:40:16 PM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 562 | View Replies]

To: tablelamp
“Under the sovereignty” doesn’t mean sole claim. If that were true, a US citizen couldn’t have a second citizenship. It means under the jurisdiction of the laws of the US. Every tourist, businessman and illegal alien who’s here from another country is under the sovereignty or jurisdiction of the US while he’s here.

It is amusing to watch someone like you attempt to explain to us the meaning of your understanding of bad law.

Prior to 1922, it was not POSSIBLE to have a dual citizen offspring. Also, Indians were under the jurisdiction, but were not allowed to become citizens. Does believing in a weird dichotomy hurt much?

589 posted on 02/04/2012 3:43:06 PM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 553 | View Replies]

To: bluecat6

Very astute. That is my working theory also.


590 posted on 02/04/2012 3:47:14 PM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 573 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
Scientific facts have an existence independent of what anyone knows or thinks. Law is different; law, by definition, is what legislators and judges say it is. Otherwise, how could the law be different in New York from New Jersey or Alabama. As Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote more than 100 years ago, when you ask a lawyer what the law is, you are asking for nothing more or less than an accurate prediction of what a court will rule if asked this quesstion next week.

Irrelevant to my point. I thought I made it very clear, but obviously not clear enough. My point was that the naysaying of many does not make someone wrong.

Any argument that someone is wrong because many others disagree with them is a fallacy of the form "argumentum ad populum."

591 posted on 02/04/2012 3:56:36 PM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 586 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
Any argument that someone is wrong because many others disagree with them is a fallacy of the form "argumentum ad populum."

True in some fields. As to the definition of NBC, no court will rule differently from Arkeney or the recent Congressional Research Service report. That is how the law currently defines the term.

592 posted on 02/04/2012 4:04:06 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 591 | View Replies]

To: David
So we continue to lose because the lawyers who advocate our side and most of their clients are living in a dreamworld.

Maybe also because the lawyers don't have enough hard evidence at their disposal. Also, regarding the funding needed; if lawyers did have access to hard evidence, why couldn't some of the people fighting this fight organize a fundraising drive to get the requisite funds? I bet a lot of people would donate if they knew that some butt kicking lawyer/lawyers were willing to take it on and had hard evidence. Even as broke as I am I'd donate a little.

593 posted on 02/04/2012 4:04:52 PM PST by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 335 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
True in some fields. As to the definition of NBC, no court will rule differently from Arkeney or the recent Congressional Research Service report. That is how the law currently defines the term.

To legally define a term requires the legal authority to do so. Once the Supreme Court defines a Constitutional term, that event absolutely denies any authority of any other court or legislature to change it.

The Supreme Court defined "natural born citizen" in Minor vs. Happerset, even stating that there was "no doubt" regarding is correctness. Therefore, any statement by anyone else who is not the Supreme Court that contradicts the definition provided by the Supreme Court lacks the authority to do so, and is legally null and void.

594 posted on 02/04/2012 4:23:49 PM PST by sourcery (If true=false, then there would be no constraints on what is possible. Hence, the world exists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 592 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

I think he informally “adopted” Barry only.


595 posted on 02/04/2012 4:49:44 PM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 584 | View Replies]

To: sourcery
Once the Supreme Court defines a Constitutional term, that event absolutely denies any authority of any other court or legislature to change it.

The Supreme Court has changed its mind many times. Brown v. Board of Education overruled Plessy v. Ferguson, for example.

The Supreme Court defined "natural born citizen" in Minor vs. Happerset, even stating that there was "no doubt" regarding is correctness. Therefore, any statement by anyone else who is not the Supreme Court that contradicts the definition provided by the Supreme Court lacks the authority to do so, and is legally null and void.

First off, the definition of NBC in Minor was dicta; Ms. Minor was not seeking to become President.

Second, Minor says there was no doubt that someone born in the U.S. to two citizen parents was a NBC and there was doubt as to whether someone born in the U.S. to alien parents was. That was not a definitive decision.

Third, several earlier Supreme Court decisions (see the footnotes in Judge Malihi's decision) had said that anyone born in the U.S. was a NBC, regardless of parentage.

Fourth, later cases are very much to the contrary; see Wong, and the cases cited in the Congressional Research Service's report.

Fifth, and most importantly, what you or I think is "null and void" doesn't matter; as I said above, "the law" means what the courts will rule tomorrow, and no court will say anything except that "Natural Born Citizen" means a citizen who wasn't naturalized.

596 posted on 02/04/2012 5:08:46 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 594 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

Newt should make this a campaign issue. Imagine the electricity he would generate if he had a news conference and called on the Georgia Secretary of State to reverse Malihi! Donations and volunteers would pour his way from the people tired of the D.C. Elite telling us they know best.


597 posted on 02/04/2012 5:13:42 PM PST by Aagcobb (I take the Constitution seriously)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 587 | View Replies]

To: Aagcobb
Newt should make this a campaign issue. Imagine the electricity he would generate if he had a news conference and called on the Georgia Secretary of State to reverse Malihi! Donations and volunteers would pour his way from the people tired of the D.C. Elite telling us they know best.

I'm pretty sure he's afraid to touch the issue. There are a LOT of conservatives who just want this to go away. They believe what they believe, and you simply can't even get them to look at the facts. There minds are made up.

598 posted on 02/04/2012 5:16:47 PM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 597 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

He should make a stand on the Constitution without fear. What has he got to lose? The elites have already rigged the game to hand the nomination to Mittens.


599 posted on 02/04/2012 5:23:50 PM PST by Aagcobb (I take the Constitution seriously)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 598 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj

Challenged? Well, it wasn’t the defendant who failed to show up or even send his lawyer.


600 posted on 02/04/2012 5:25:50 PM PST by vharlow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 501-550551-600601-650 ... 701-726 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson